Agricultural employment:
has the decline ended?
The long-term decrease in farm employment
has moderated during recent years,
although technological gains continue,
and farmers often need to moonlight in
nonfarm jobs in order to remain in the business
PATRICIA A. DALY
Although agricultural employment accounts for less
than 4 percent of all jobs, it has an important place in
the Nation's economy . The ability of such a small percentage of the labor force to provide for most of the
country's food needs, as well as for exports, testifies to
the skill and productivity of the agricultural sector .
Agriculture has received extensive media coverage in
recent years, especially concerning parity prices, price
supports, and grain exports and embargoes. Its employment has been affected by the transformations in farm
number, size, and scale. As farm technology has improved, the more intensive use of capital equipment has
shifted emphasis from people to machinery. During the
last three decades these structural and technological
changes have had a profound impact on jobs and have
affected both the character of the agricultural labor
force and its size . However, since 1970, these changes
have slowed dramatically . (See table 1 .)
During 1976-80, agricultural employment held about
steady at an annual average of 3.3 million, the sharp declines of the 1950's and 1960's having virtually stopped.
Since 1970, agricultural employment has only declined
by 150,000 compared with losses of 1 .7 and 2.0 million
in the previous two decades. (See table 2.)
Patricia A. I7aly is an economist in the Office of Current Employment
Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics .
Because of the nature of agricultural employment, it
is useful to examine two data series in order to obtain a
more complete picture of the trends and composition of
the labor force. The monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) provides information for those whose primary
employment is in agriculture and who are age 16 or
older . It comprises the self-employed and persons who
work for wages or salaries, as well as those who put in
15 hours or more per week as unpaid workers on family
farms. The Hired Farm Working Force data are
obtained from supplementary questions to the CPS asked
only in December and cover all persons age 14 or older
who worked in agriculture at some point during that
calendar year for wages or salaries . These two series
overlap for those wage and salary workers whose primary occupation is in agriculture, but both are necessary to account for the many who combine work in
agriculture with other pursuits . Both surveys confirm
that recently the long-term decrease in farm employment has slowed .
In agriculture, the primary unit has historically been
the family farm . In the past, land was abundant and labor rather than capital was the main input . Family
members were the primary suppliers of the labor, and
their goal was to provide enough food for their own
consumption, as well as a surplus to sell . The impetus
behind the development and adoption of technology on
individual farms was the desire to raise more agricultur11
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW November 1981 a Employment in Agriculture
al products or produce them at a lower cost, within the
constraints of the family's fixed resources of land and
labor. The immediate result was an increase in the income of the innovative farm family, but quite naturally
production also rose for the agriculture industry as a
whole, as the use of technology grew . So the supply of
agricultural products increased more than demand,
driving prices down . Many farming units could no longer make enough income and were forced out of business . Some displaced workers moved into nonfarm
occupations, and others reverted to small-scale or subsistence farming, combined with nonagricultural employment when it was available.' Both moonlighting
and nonfarm employment by family members have enabled families to stay in farming.
Worker characteristics
Sex, age, and race. Agricultural employment tends to be
disproportionately male and white. In 1980, women
accounted for only 20 percent of such employment,
compared with 43 percent of other jobs . Furthermore,
almost one-third of the women in agriculture were unpaid family workers. In contrast, more than half of the
men were self-employed. About 40 percent of each sex
were wage and salary workers. Both men and women
tended to be older than their nonagricultural counterparts, as the percentages in the following tabulation for
1980 show :
Agricultural
Men :
16 to 24 years . . . .
25 to 54 years . . . .
55 years or older . . .
Women :
16 to 24 years
. . . .
25 to 54 years . . . .
55 years or older . . .
Nonagricultural
23 .7
49 .3
27 .0
20 .0
65 .0
15 .0
21 .8
24 .1
61 .5
16 .9
62 .5
13 .4
By race or ethnicity, whites make up 92 percent of
agricultural employment, blacks 8 percent. Hispanics,
who are included in the white total, make up 7 percent.
Of the working age population, whites account for 88
percent, blacks 12 percent, and Hispanics 5 percent.z In
the past, blacks made up a larger proportion of agricultural employment, 11 percent in 1970 and 16 percent in
1962, while representing 11 percent of the population in
1970 and 10 percent in 1962 . A historical series of farm
operators' shows a long-term decline of blacks and other races as a proportion of total farm operators in the
United States and the South since 1920 .
Minorities are predominantly wage and salary workers and are less apt to be self-employed than are whites .
Wage and salary jobs accounted for 39 percent of
white, 74 percent of black, and 90 percent of Hispanic
agricultural employment . Fifty-one percent of the white
12
Table 1 . Employed agricultural workers by selected
characteristics, annual averages, 1970 and 1980
[In thousands]
Total, 16 years and over
Men . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Wage and salary workers . .
Self-employed workers . . . .
Unpaid family workers . . . . .
Women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Wage and salary workers . .
Self-employed workers . . . .
Unpaid family workers . . . . .
Whites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Blacks and others . . . . . . . . . .
1980
1970
Worker
Number Percent Number Percent
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3,462
2,861
979
1,722
160
601
174
88
339
3,094
368
100.0
82 .6
34 .2
60.2
5 .6
17 .4
29 .0
14 .6
56.4
89 .4
10.6
3,310
2,664
1,116
1,446
101
646
267
182
197
3,052
258
100.0
80 .5
41 .9
54 .3
3 .8
19 .5
41 .3
28 .2
30.5
92 .2
7 .8
workers were self-employed, compared with only 23
percent of blacks and 9 percent of Hispanics. Much
smaller proportions were unpaid family workers: 9 percent of whites, 3 percent of blacks, and just 1 percent
of Hispanics.
Region and residence. The South and North Central regions (as designated by the U.S . Bureau of Census)
have always provided the largest share of the agricultural labor force. In 1980, more than 70 percent of those
employed in this sector lived in 1 of these 2 regions.
Nevertheless, there has been substantial growth in the
Western region, which was the only area to record an
increase in the level of agricultural employment . (See table 3.)
Agricultural employment once implied farm residence, but this is no longer the case . Thus, while 75
percent of agricultural workers lived on farms in 1960,
this proportion dwindled to 63 percent in 1970, and 47
percent in 1980 .4
Jobs decline, those remaining change
In 1870, almost 50 percent of employed persons
worked in agriculture 5 and one farmworker could only
supply five people with farm products . By 1980, just 4
percent of the employed were in agriculture, and each
one supplied food for nearly 70 others .6 As the need to
commit a large percentage of the work force to agriculture diminished and its share of the Nation's jobs declined, some fundamental changes occurred in the nature of agricultural employment .
Occupation . The term "agricultural ladder" was once
used to describe the desired progression from hired
hand to tenant farmer to owner-operator. But as agriculture has changed-to consist of fewer, larger farms,
which require large capital outlays-the likelihood of
this type of advancement has diminished .
Most agricultural workers can be classified into two
major groups of approximately equal size : farmers and
farm managers, and farm laborers and supervisors .
They account for more than 80 percent of agricultural
employment . As agriculture has become more specialized and as the individual farm involves more resources,
the managerial function has grown . Occupational support services include cropdusting, animal breeding, and
veterinary medicine, as well as a variety of other jobs,
such as sales and office work . The percentage of those
in this "other" category grew markedly during 1972-80,
from 11 .6 to 18 .3 percent .7 This jump relates to the
expanded use of agricultural services and the decline in
the number of farms and farmers, as the following percentages suggest :
1972
1980
100
100
.
.
.
.
.
48
26
13
1
1
44
27
9
1
1
. . .
12
18
Total
Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Farm laborers (wage) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Farm laborers (unpaid family workers) .
Farm managers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other (cropdusters, veterinarians, and so
forth) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Farms and farmers. The number of farms declined by
3 .25 million since 1950, with the largest decrease-1 .7
million-occurring between 1950 and 1960 . A drop of
1 million occurred in the 1960's, followed by 0 .5 million
more in the 1970's . (See table 2 .) As the number of
farms decreased, their average size increased . This, combined with several sociological and economic factors has
resulted in a different proportional makeup in the class
of worker categories-wage or salary workers, selfemployed, and unpaid family workers-in the industry .
Family farms still predominate, though there is an increase in the number of corporate farms, as family or
individually owned farms incorporate for economic or
legal reasons." Also, many family or individually owned
farms are dominated by agribusiness because the producers contract with these firms before production begins .'
Since 1950, the number of wage and salary workers
declined by 0.25 million, but the wage and salary share
of total agricultural employment increased from 23 to
Table 2.
Comparison of employed agricultural workers
and the number of farms, annual averages, selected years,
1930-80
[In thousands]
Year
1930 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1940 .
1950 . . .
1960
1970 . .
1980 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Workers'
Farms
10,340
9,540
7,160
5,458
3,462
3,310
6,295
6,102
5,388
3,962
2,954
2,428
' Data for 1950 forward relate to persons 16 years and over, all other data relate to per-
sons 14 years and aver.
42 percent. Over the same period, the number of selfemployed dropped by 2.7 million, from 61 to 49 percent
of agricultural employment . Farm incorporations, in
which farm owners are transformed into wage and salary workers, partially account for these changes.
The number of unpaid family workers in 1980 is
about one-third of what it was in 1950, and these workers now constitute 9 percent of agricultural employment . The largest decline occurred in the last 10 years,
as many women moved into paid occupations .
Hours of work. As is generally well-recognized, agricultural workers tend to put in more hours than other employees; in 1980, their workweek averaged 45 .1 hours,
versus 38 .3 hours for nonagricultural workers . For
those with full-time jobs, the comparable workweeks
were 53 .3 and 42 .5 hours. As shown in the following
tabulation, more than 40 percent of agricultural workers
spend 49 hours or more at work in their primary job,
compared with fewer than 15 percent of nonagricultural
workers :
All
agriculture
Workweek
Total . . . .
Wage and salary
Agriculture
Nonagriculture
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
. . .
29.9
30 .6
24 .5
49 hours or more .
41 .9
32 .9
12.9
1 to 34 hours
35 to 48 hours
. .
28 .1
36 .6
62.7
One reason for these differences is that agricultural
workers are more likely to be self-employed, and the
latter have always put in longer hours than wage and
salary workers, a factor that skews the hours distribution . Nevertheless, even among wage and salary workers, full-time agricultural workers averaged 49 .1 hours,
compared with 42 .1 hours for persons in nonagricultural jobs .
Multiple jobholding. An interesting characteristic of agricultural employment is the high incidence of multiple
jobholding . In 1980, about 5 percent of all workers held
two jobs or more, and of this group, 19 percent held
one job or more in agriculture .
Farmers and farm managers reported a frequent need
to moonlight . Because agricultural product prices fluctuate and consequently farm income varies, holding a
second job stabilizes the income for those employed in
agriculture and has allowed many to remain in agriculture when their farm income alone may have been inadequate . The median workweek, in May 1980, for
moonlighting agricultural workers (60 hours) is substantially longer than that of workers in nonagricultural industries (49 hours) . Moonlighters who are self-employed
in agriculture work a particularly long week, averaging
68 hours, compared with 51 hours for wage and salary
workers.
13
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW November 1981 o Employment in Agriculture
Comparison of employed agricultural workers and the hired farm working force by geographic region, annual
Table 3 .
averages, selected years, 1960-80
[In thousands]
Northeast
United States
Year
Number
Percent
Number
North Central region
Percent
Number
Percent
West
South
Number
Percent
Number
Percent
2,425
1,248
1,214
1,202
1,161
42.4
36,0
358
36 .4
35 .0
856
538
563
627
640
150
15 .5
16 .6
19 .0
19 .3
2,088
1,093
1,074
1,071
56 .5
43 .9
40 .7
40 .4
630
564
664
607
17.1
22.7
25.2
22.9
Employed agricultural workers
1960'
1970 .
1975 .
1979 .
1980 .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
. .
. .
. . . .. . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . . ..
5,723
3,462
3,390
3,298
3,314
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
426
299
302
261
272
7 .4
8.6
8.9
7.9
82
2,016
1,377
1,311
1,209
1,241
35 .2
39 .8
38 .7
36 .6
374
Hired farm working force'
1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1970 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1975
1979 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3,693
2,488
2,639
2,651
100 .0
100 .0
100 .0
100,0
295
241
227
188
8.0
9.7
8.6
7.1
679
590
674
785
18 .4
237
255
29.6
' Data relate to persons 14 years and over, all other data relate to persons 16 years and over. Data have been collected biennially since 1977 .
Seasonality. The seasonal nature of agriculture and its
dependence on weather, combined with the high perishability of the product, makes agriculture unique . Employment in agriculture varies from season to season
and the difference in employment between summer and
winter months is sharpest for farm laborers and supervisors, as chart 1 shows. As would be expected, employment of farmers and farm managers and of
agricultural service workers is more stable .
Hired farm work force
Size decreases. The size of the hired farm working force
declined from an average of 3 .6 million in the 1950's to
3.2 million in the 1960's and has been fairly steady at
2.7 million in recent years.10
Contributing to the drop has been the slackening of
demand for labor as mechanization has eliminated
many harvesting tasks. Some estimates have been made
of the number of jobs lost to certain labor-saving devices. For example, the National Rural Center reported
that the mechanization of the cotton harvester displaced
approximately 4 million people between 1945 and 1965,
and similarly, there was an estimated loss of more than
30,000 tomato harvesting jobs between 1966 and 1970
because of mechanical harvesters . Substantial job losses
have been predicted in the tobacco industry because of
mechanization in the flu-cured tobacco belt ."
There are many reasons for individual farmers to
adopt new technology, with long-term cost savings being the primary motivating force. The uncertainty of the
available supply of agricultural workers has also been a
factor in the decision to mechanize, because farmers
wish to minimize the risk of losing a crop because of a
possible shortage of harvest workers. Thus, there can be
a circular relationship between declines in agricultural
employment and increased mechanization . When farmers invest in labor-saving technology, this reduces the
aggregate number of available jobs, which in turn, in14
duces hired farmworkers to seek nonagricultural employment, diminishing the labor supply further and continuing the cycle. 12
Job attachment. The hired farm work force includes
many people who spend only a fraction of the year doing farmwork . The following tabulation classifies the
percentage of hired farmworkers in 1979 by number of
days worked :
Workers
Total hired farm work force
Casual (25 days or less) . . . . . . . .
Seasonal (25 to 149 days) . . . . . .
Regular (150 to 249 days) . . . . . .
Permanent (250 days or more) . . .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
100
34
37
13
16
Seventy percent of the hired farm working force
worked less than 150 days in 1979 . This type of job
may be ideal for those interested in part time, sporadic
employment but frustrating for those who need to piece
together several jobs to maintain a steady source of income .
Since the 1950's, there has been an increase in the
number of casual workers, with slight declines recorded
in the other categories .
The limited job attachment to the hired farm working
force, in general, can be discerned through an examination of the primary labor force activities of this group.
Almost half considered themselves to be out of the labor force. Less than 30 percent reported farmwork as
their major activity of the year, and about 20 percent
thought of nonfarm employment as their primary status. About three-fourths of those who did farmwork,
but generally considered themselves out of the labor
force, were students ; most of the remainder were
housewives .
Overall, Hispanics appear to have the strongest tie to
farmwork . They tend to be less educated and less experienced in other work, so they are more dependent on
farmwork for employment opportunities .
The educational attainment of the hired farm working
force is quite low compared with other workers . Educational levels are particularly low among minorities, as
the median number of years of study completed was
only 5 .4 for Hispanics and 7 .7 for blacks . Because education is a significant factor in occupational mobility, a
lack of schooling often makes it difficult for minorities
to leave this occupation . Thus, they spend a much longer time in hired farmwork, as the percent distribution
for 1977 shows :
All
Less than 5 years
5 to 10 years . . .
11 to 20 years . .
20 years or more
Not reported . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
workers
Whites
53
22
11
9
6
60
21
10
4
5
Hispanics
Blacks
and
others
36
19
17
12
10
35
20
17
18
10
The effects of time
The characteristics of the hired farm working force
have changed over the years, with the most significant
differences occurring in racial composition, regional distribution, and residence. In 1950, blacks and other races
composed about 29 percent, this increased to 37 percent
Chart 1 . Persons employed in agricultural
occupations by month, 1980 (not seasonally
adjusted)
Jan
Mar .
May
Month
July
Sept
Nov .
in 1960, and then declined sharply to 22 percent in
1970 and to 13 percent in 1979 . Hispanics have
accounted for 11 to 12 percent of the hired farm working force since 1975, the first year data for Hispanics
were tabulated .
The decline in the hired farm working force has been
sharpest in the South, where the number dropped by
1 million between 1960 and 1970 . Since 1970, the number of farmworkers in the South has stabilized, while
there has been an increase in the North Central region .
(See table 3 .) The differences in the regional distribution
of farmworkers between the Hired Farm Working Force
series and annual averages from the Current Population
Survey reflect dissimilarities in the crops grown and in
the types of farming operations . The use of hired
farmworkers tends to be more prevalent where irrigation is extensive, where fruits and vegetables are the
leading crops, and in plantation and ranching areas
where farming units have always been larger than can
be handled by a single family ."
Another change has been the decline in the proportion who live on farms. In 1979, over 80 percent of the
hired farm work force had nonfarm residences, compared with about 70 percent a decade earlier, and 35
percent more than 40 years ago.
The percentage of women in the hired farm working
force has ranged from 21 to 30 percent in the last 35
years and was 22 percent in 1979 . Among women, there
has been a sharp increase in the proportion of students
and a decline among homemakers . '4
The average age for hired farmworkers differs between races. Whites were the youngest, 63 percent were
ages 14 to 24, compared with 37 percent for Hispanics,
and 40 percent of blacks . This reflects the many white
students who perform farmwork temporarily, while for
minority members it remains a career .
Migrant workers. Migrant farmworkers, defined as those
who leave their home county overnight and work in another one at some time during the year, are a small subset of the hired farm work force. These workers, though
few numerically, attract considerable attention because
of their living conditions .
The number of migrant workers was close to 200,000
throughout the 1970's, a decline from 400,000 in 1960 .
Although they accounted for only 7 to 8 percent of the
work force in the 1970's, migrant workers have fulfilled
a significant need in agriculture . Mechanization has not
spread at an even rate across production, particularly in
the harvesting phase and some crops will always have
to be handpicked because of their delicate nature . The
availability of migrant farmworkers is a factor which
has . allowed increased crop specialization . Without
them, farmers would be limited to the local labor supply and might have to stagger the harvesting times of
15
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW November 1981 . Employment in Agriculture
crops, losing the ecomonic advantages of specialization .
It has also been suggested that the availability of migrant workers saves a large amount of U.S . agricultural
production that would otherwise be lost in spoilage ."
The migrant labor force in 1979 was predominantly
male; only one-fourth was female . The migrant men
tend to be slightly older than the men in the total hired
farm working force, whereas migrant women are somewhat younger. Blacks and Hispanics contribute disproportionately to the migrant labor supply, although the
majority are white. The largest proportion of migrant
workers have their home base in the South (40 percent),
followed by the West (29 percent), and North Central
(26 percent) regions . Fewer than 6 percent are found in
the Northeast.
Many migrants travel long distances to work, though
the extent varies by region of origin . Most of the migrants begin their travels in the South, and these migrants travel the farthest, as almost 40 percent record
over 1,000 miles in a season . In the West and North
Central regions, the majority of the workers travel less
than 500 miles, as do nearly all the migrants from the
Northeast. Thus, it appears that there is a sizable group
of migrants, presumably originating in the South, who
follow the crops over long distances, while other migrants remain relatively close to home .
The employment future
The U.S . agricultural system is considered to be the
most efficient and productive in the world. Productivity
continues to increase,'6 although opinion varies as to
whether the tremendous biological, chemical, and mechanical advances of the last few decades can persist .
The complexity and scale of modern agriculture may
pose prohibitive costs in realizing further substantial
productivity gains."
It is possible that some sort of lower limit on the
number of agricultural workers is being approached .
The recent stabilization of the total agricultural labor
force and the hired farm working force suggest this .
Also, the decline in agricultural employment has been
less than was projected by BLS in the early 1970's . It
was then expected to drop at a rate of almost 5 percent
annually between 1972 and 1980 ;'8 the actual rate of decrease has been much less .
The decline was forecast because productivity was
expected to rise more than demand . However, the former rose less than expected (3 .7 percent actual versus
6.1 percent projected) and the latter increased more
than anticipated (1 .5 percent rather than the projected
0.5 percent annual increase). Rising exports, which have
more than doubled in quantity in the past 10 years,
partially account for the growth in demand ." More recent projections of farm jobs anticipate an annual decline of 1 .5 percent between 1980 and 1985 and a
2.3-percent decrease between 1985 and 1990 in a lowgrowth scenario; and an 0.7-percent increase between
1980 and 1985 ; followed by a drop of 2.1 percent annually between 1985 and 1990 in the high-growth model."'
The questions now are whether the 1980's will bring
another round of technological advances and whether
the international demand for agricultural products will
continue to rise. The effect of these two forces will determine in part the future size of the agricultural labor
force.
Overall, it is difficult to predict what will happen in
agriculture and its employment . There is a growing concern that all the changes in the structure of agriculture
have not been positive . Some serious problems with erosion and soil depletion, debt burden, and obstacles to
entry have surfaced . Research is being done on intermediate technology, organic farming, and small farm viability, and some data suggest that smaller farms are
more efficient, productive, and innovative ." As the fear
of economic and environmental problems in agriculture
increases, these options may become more important.
FOOTNOTES
'James S. Holt, "Introduction to the Seasonal Farm Labor Problem" in Robert D. Emerson, ed., Seasonal Agricultural Labor Markets
in the United States, preliminary report submitted to the Department
of Labor, September 1980, pp . 4 and 5.
The term "blacks" refers to all persons in the survey other than
whites . In addition to blacks, the group includes American Indians,
Alaskan natives, Asians, and Pacific Islanders. Data on persons of
Hispanic ethnicity are collected independently of racial data . In the
1970 census, approximately 96 percent of their population was white.
'Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, Bicentennial Edition, Part 2 (U .S. Bureau of the Census, 1975), p. 465.
The term "farm operator" is used to designate a person who operates
a farm, either doing the work himself or directly supervising the job.
This person may be the owner, a member of the owner's household; a
salaried manager; or a tenant, renter, or sharecropper .
' Farm Population of the United States: 1979, Series P-27, No . 53
16
(U .S . Bureau of the Census, jointly with U.S . Department of Agriculture, 1980), p. 5; and later reports .
`Historical Statistics of the United States: 1979, p. 127.
' Changes in Farm Production and Efficiency, 1978 (U .S . Department of Agriculture, Economics, Statistics, and Cooperative Service),
Bulletin 628, p. 57 and later preliminary estimates .
' 1972 was used for comparison, because consistent occupational
data are not available for prior years.
'B . Delworth Gardner and Rulon D. Pope, "How is Scale and
Structure Determined in Agriculture?" American Journal of Agricultural Economics, May 1978, p. 299.
AI Krebs, "From Seedling to Supermarket: Vertical Integration in
the Food Industry" in Kenneth M. Coughlin, ed., Perspectives on the
Structure of American Agriculture, Volume H..- Federal Farm Policies
(Washington, D.C., Rural America, 1980), p. 44 ; and Ann
Crittenden, "More and More Conglomerate Links in U.S . Food
Chain," The New York Times, February 1, 1981, p. E-3 .
~° Data for the hired farm working force was obtained from the
Hired Farm Working Force of 1977 (U .S . Department of Agriculture,
Economics, Statistics and Cooperative Service, 1979), Agricultural
Economic Report No . 437, unpublished data from 1979 and earlier
reports in the series . The data had been collected annually in December through 1977 but are now collected only every other year, that is
1979, 1981 .
" Heather Tischbein, "Science in Whose Interest? A Look at the
Beneficiaries of Agricultural Research," Federal Farm Policies, p. 41 .
For a technical discussion of this relationship, see David
Zillerman and Richard A. Just, "Labor Supply Uncertainty and Technology Adoption" in Robert D. Emerson, ed ., Seasonal Agricultural
Labor Markets in the United States. preliminary report submitted to
the Department of Labor, September 1980.
" Holt, "Seasonal Farm Labor," pp . 9-10 .
Benjamin N. Matta, "Employment and Earnings Outcomes in the
Hired Farmworker Market" (prepared for the U.S . Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 1980).
"Alice Larson, "Last and Still
Farmworkers in U.S . Agriculture" in
spectives on the Structure of American
From the Farm, p. 22 .
" Changes in Farm Production and
estimates .
Least: Migrant and Seasonal
Kenneth M. Coughlin, ed ., PerAgriculture, Volume l: The View
Efficiency, and later preliminary
" Willard W. Cochrane, The Development of American Agriculture :
A Historical Analysis (Minneapolis, University of Minnesota
Press,
1979), p. 329.
1" Ronald E. Kutscher, "Projections of GNP, income, output, and
employment," Monthly Labor Review, December 1973, pp . 27-42.
"Agricultural Statistics, U.S . Department of Agriculture, 1980,
p. 561, and later preliminary estimates.
2" The farm jobs projections are based on productivity and output
projections for agriculture. For more detail, see Valerie A. Personick,
"The outlook for industry output and employment through 1990,"
Monthly Labor Review, August 1981, pp . 28-41 .
Frances Moore Lappe and Joseph Collins with Cary Fowler, Food
First: Beyond the Myth of Scarcity (Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1977), pp. 155-8, 162.
A note on communications
The Monthly Labor Review welcomes communications that supplement, challenge, or expand on research published in its pages . To be
considered for publication, communications should be factual and analytical, not polemical in tone. Communications should be addressed
to the Editor-in-Chief, Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S . Department of Labor, Washington, D.C . 20212.